This is the plea from one villager after developers submitted a planning application to build 240 homes on a farmer’s field in Southminster.

Gladman Developments has submitted a formal application to Maldon District Council this week to build an estate off North End, on fields behind New Moor Crescent.

Richard Saward, 69, of New Moor Close, believes that the infrastructure in the Dengie is just not good enough to cope with the influx of houses proposed for the Dengie peninsula - including 450 houses allocated for Burnham in the council’s Local Development Plan.

He said: “There’s just no thought gone into the Dengie hundred area at all, because we don’t have the facilities.

“I think they need to stay away from the Dengie hundred altogether."

See this week's Standard for the full story.

Comments (4)

Anyone with half an ounce of common-sense (unlike the MDC's planning department) would find it pretty hard to disagree with Mr. Saward. The local infrastructure (roads/sewers) on the Dengie is woefully inadequate for what is currently here, without adding significantly more without major upgrades.

Anyone with half an ounce of common-sense (unlike the MDC's planning department) would find it pretty hard to disagree with Mr. Saward. The local infrastructure (roads/sewers) on the Dengie is woefully inadequate for what is currently here, without adding significantly more without major upgrades.El Presendente

Developers aren't interested in things like access and drainage or even if the area is/was or could be a flooded due to weather weirding. Behind the well rehearsed corporate spin ALL they care about is getting maximum build for their pound out of any land they have available.

As for “ we need more houses ” argument, your repetitive message must have a 3ft groove worn in it by now.... If that's the case for new housing is so strong answer me this why are their unsold new-builds + existing stock on the local market? Has there suddenly been a local employment surge or is it because one of the big 4 supermarket chains who have their eyes on (example) Burnham have made a hollow promise to hire 'x' amount of staff when elsewhere (busier stores) more and more checkouts are slowly going automated.

These proposed local developments reek of greed (and back-handers no doubt). The fact that our local councillors have remained silent during the consultation process can only lead to the assumption they are on the developers pay-roll too, because otherwise they'd be speaking-out on behalf of the local people, the vast 'majority' of whom oppose any increase in housing NOT because of the NIMBY factor, because the area can't sustain anymore growth and more importantly there are far more suitable areas nearer larger roads, that have better/adequate transport connections that will absorb large-scale development easier unlike the the Dengie.

Developers aren't interested in things like access and drainage or even if the area is/was or could be a flooded due to weather weirding. Behind the well rehearsed corporate spin ALL they care about is getting maximum build for their pound out of any land they have available.
As for “ we need more houses ” argument, your repetitive message must have a 3ft groove worn in it by now.... If that's the case for new housing is so strong answer me this why are their unsold new-builds + existing stock on the local market? Has there suddenly been a local employment surge or is it because one of the big 4 supermarket chains who have their eyes on (example) Burnham have made a hollow promise to hire 'x' amount of staff when elsewhere (busier stores) more and more checkouts are slowly going automated.
These proposed local developments reek of greed (and back-handers no doubt). The fact that our local councillors have remained silent during the consultation process can only lead to the assumption they are on the developers pay-roll too, because otherwise they'd be speaking-out on behalf of the local people, the vast 'majority' of whom oppose any increase in housing NOT because of the NIMBY factor, because the area can't sustain anymore growth and more importantly there are far more suitable areas nearer larger roads, that have better/adequate transport connections that will absorb large-scale development easier unlike the the Dengie.El Presendente

Jack222 wrote:
We need more houses. Pass the proposal with the proviso that the developer must imporove infrasatructure.

NO!!! put the infrastructure in FIRST! But what developer is really going to pay for news roads / sewers / medical centers / shops.... and so on! it will just be more empty promises from greed drven developers who are eating up OUR countryside under the guise of "we need more affordable homes".

[quote][p][bold]Jack222[/bold] wrote:
We need more houses. Pass the proposal with the proviso that the developer must imporove infrasatructure.[/p][/quote]NO!!! put the infrastructure in FIRST! But what developer is really going to pay for news roads / sewers / medical centers / shops.... and so on! it will just be more empty promises from greed drven developers who are eating up OUR countryside under the guise of "we need more affordable homes".Latchingdon